Were tactical nukes used in afghanistan?

Consider this population study conducted by the Uranium Medical Research Centre followin operation "enduring freedom"

"Radiological measurements of the uranium concentrations in Afghan civilians’ urine samples indicate abnormally high levels of non-depleted uranium. Radiological measurements of Afghan civilians’ have high concentrations of uranium in a range beginning at 4 X’s and reaching to over 20 X’s normal populations. This is 400% to 2000% higher than the study controls and normal population baselines of the concentrations of nanograms of uranium per liter of urine in a 24-hour sample. UMRC has completed initial but still preliminary studies that corroborate these finding in biological controls and geological samples taken in Operation Enduring Freedom bombsites."


http://www.umrc.net/AfghanistanOEF.asp

A prediction: someone from the junor varsity debunking squad will claim that these people were merely living on a natural uranium deposit and were bombed with conventional weapons, magically enriching the uranium to weapon grade purity.
:crazy:

What's been keeping me from believing that it was some sort of nuclear detonation is that I've always been under the impression that seismological detectors around the world would have seen it. There were a few tremors reported around the same time, but do nukes have a characteristic seismological signature different from an earthquake? I'd think so, but not sure.

Also, it seems that it would be very hard to hide any kind of nuclear detonation from satellites, unless it was very deep underground. I don't think China would have kept quite about us using any sort of nuke right next to their border. Same goes for Russia and India (I would assume Pakistan could be silenced).

Finally, if the US DOES have 'mini-nukes' that could escape normal detection when they detonate, why the controversy about studying ways of making them (recent Bush policy)?

The uranium data still stands unexplained, however.

on edit: speling. 'i' before 'e' unless after 'c' -- or in the word 'seismological'...

Although the study itself suggests there are two possibilities, one being "the presence of uranium extracted from the front-end of the fuel or weapons production cycles", e.g. NDU (not "enriched", I believe). That would be very difficult to explain, and detonated tactical nukes wouldn't explain it either.

But the other possibility ("anomalous geological and agricultural conditions") is difficult to explain too. I don't know my Afghanistan geography well enough to figure out where this study took place in relation to the Khawaja Rawash mountain range (north of Kabul), but there was a pretty significant Soviet-run uranium mining operation there in the 80's.

:shrug:

(On edit) Hey, they get to that at the very end:

"The possibility of Natural Uranium remains under investigation. Local geological samples and controls do not substantiate a source other than the OEF bombing.Ê There are no geological, commercial and agricultural phenomena or activities and uses in the environs of the contaminated populations that might explain the contamination."

So I'm sure they know about Khawaja Rawash, so they're saying their sample population was nowhere near there. There's also natural beryllium in the Kumar Valley, but I expect the isotopes would be different enough to rule that out.

More questions than answers, but good ones to ask. :thumbsup: